Arxiv:1706.04845V2 [Math.AG] 26 Jan 2020 Usos Ewudas Iet Hn .Batfrifrigu Bu [B Comments
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
RELATIVE SEMI-AMPLENESS IN POSITIVE CHARACTERISTIC PAOLO CASCINI AND HIROMU TANAKA Abstract. Given an invertible sheaf on a fibre space between projective varieties of positive characteristic, we show that fibre- wise semi-ampleness implies relative semi-ampleness. The same statement fails in characteristic zero. Contents 1. Introduction 2 1.1. Description of the proof 3 2. Preliminary results 6 2.1. Notation and conventions 6 2.2. Basic results 8 2.3. Dimension formulas for universally catenary schemes 11 2.4. Relative semi-ampleness 13 2.5. Relative Keel’s theorem 18 2.6. Thickening process 20 2.7. Alteration theorem for quasi-excellent schemes 24 3. (Theorem C)n−1 implies (Theorem A)n 26 4. Numerically trivial case 30 4.1. The case where the total space is normal 30 4.2. Normalisation of the base 31 4.3. The vertical case 32 arXiv:1706.04845v2 [math.AG] 26 Jan 2020 4.4. (Theorem A)n implies (Theoerem B)n 37 4.5. Generalisation to algebraic spaces 43 5. (Theorem A)n and (Theorem B)n imply (Theorem C)n 44 6. Proofofthemaintheorems 49 7. Examples 50 2010 Mathematics Subject Classification. 14C20, 14G17. Key words and phrases. relative semi-ample, positive characteristic. The first author was funded by EPSRC. The second author was funded by EP- SRC and the Grant-in-Aid for Scientific Research (KAKENHI No. 18K13386). We would like to thank Y. Gongyo, Z. Patakfalvi and S. Takagi for many useful dis- cussions. We would also like to thank B. Bhatt for informing us about [BS17]. We would like to thank the referee for many useful comments. 1 2 PAOLOCASCINIANDHIROMUTANAKA 7.1. Examples over Fp 50 7.2. Counterexamples in characteristic zero 50 References 51 1. Introduction It is a fundamental problem in algebraic geometry to study under what conditions a nef line bundle on a projective variety is semi-ample. For instance, the abundance conjecture predicts that, on a minimal projective variety, the canonical divisor is always semi-ample. On the other hand, it is not easy in general to find criteria that hold for any line bundle. Over a field of positive characteristic, it seems that semi-ampleness sometimes behaves better than in characteristic zero. One of the most typical examples is Keel’s result [Kee99], which has recently played a crucial role in the minimal model program of positive characteristic (e.g. see [HX15]). The goal of this paper is to provide a necessary and sufficient con- dition under which, given a morphism of Fp-schemes f : X → Y , an invertible sheaf L on X is relatively semi-ample. More specifically, the following is our main result (note that it only holds in positive characteristic, cf. §7.2): Theorem 1.1. Let f : X → S be a projective morphism of noetherian Fp-schemes. Let L be an invertible sheaf on X. Assume that L|Xs is semi-ample for all the points s ∈ S, where Xs denotes the fibre of f over s. Then L is f-semi-ample. In general, even if the schemes X and S appearing in Theorem 1.1, are of finite type over a field of positive characteristic, we need to consider not only closed points of S but all the points of S (cf. Exam- ple 7.3). On the other hand, we may ignore non-closed points of S if the base field is uncountable: Theorem 1.2. Let k be an uncountable field of positive characteristic and let f : X → S be a projective k-morphism of schemes of finite type over k. Let L be an invertible sheaf on X. Assume that L|Xs is semi- ample for all the closed points s ∈ S, where Xs denotes the fibre of f over s. Then L is f-semi-ample. RELATIVE SEMI-AMPLENESS IN POSITIVE CHARACTERISTIC 3 1.1. Description of the proof. Although the schemes X and S ap- pearing in Theorem 1.1 could be of infinite dimension, it is easy to reduce the problem to the case where X is of finite dimension (cf. Re- mark 2.14). Furthermore, replacing S by Spec OS,s for a point s ∈ S, we may assume that X and S are excellent. Then the proof of Theo- rem 1.1 proceeds by induction on the dimensiond of X. To clarify the structure of the proof, we introduce the following three statements: Theorem A. Let f : X → S be a projective surjective morphism of excellent Fp-schemes with connected fibres, where X is normal and of dimension n ∈ Z≥0. Let L be an invertible sheaf on X such that L|Xs is semi-ample for all the points s ∈ S. Then L is f-semi-ample. Theorem B. Let f : X → S be a projective surjective morphism of excellent reduced Fp-schemes, where X is of dimension n ∈ Z≥0. Let L be an f-numerically trivial invertible sheaf on X such that L|Xs is semi-ample for all the points s ∈ S. Then L is f-semi-ample. Theorem C. Let f : X → S be a projective surjective morphism of excellent Fp-schemes with connected fibres, where X has dimension n ∈ Z≥0. Let L be an invertible sheaf on X such that L|Xs is semi- ample for all the points s ∈ S. Then L is f-semi-ample. Remark 1.3. After we submitted a preliminary version of this paper, B. Bhatt kindly informed us that he and P. Scholze have a proof of Theorem B as a consequence of [BS17, Theorem 1.3]. Since their proof is very different from ours, we decided to keep it as it was (see Section 4). For any n ∈ Z≥0, we denote by (Theorem A)n, (Theorem B)n, or (Theorem C)n the corresponding theorem in the case where X has dimension n. For any n, m ∈ Z≥0, (Theorem B)n,m denotes the cor- responding theorem in the case where X has dimension n and S has dimension m. The proof of our main theorem is divided into three steps. (I) (Theorem C)n−1 implies (Theorem A)n (cf. Theorem 3.3). (II) (Theorem A)n implies (Theorem B)n (cf. Theorem 4.5). (III) (Theorem A)n and (Theorem B)n imply (Theorem C)n (cf. The- orem 5.6). We now briefly describe these steps. 4 PAOLOCASCINIANDHIROMUTANAKA (I) Let f : X → S be as in (Theorem A)n. As X is normal, we may assume by standard arguments that both X and S are integral normal schemes. Using the Iitaka fibration induced by L|XK(S) where XK(S) denotes the generic fibre of f, we are reduced to the case where L|XK(S) is numerically trivial or ample (cf. Claim in the proof of Theorem 3.3). Note that, in this argument, we might replace X by a birational model and this requires the condition of X to be normal. If L|XK(S) is numerically trivial, then we are done by taking a suitable alteration of the base scheme (cf. Proposition 3.2). Thus, it suffices to treat the case where L|XK(S) is ample. By a relative version of Keel’s theorem (cf. Proposition 2.20), it is enough to show that the restriction of L to its f-exceptional locus Ef (L) is relatively semi-ample. This directly follows from (Theorem C)n−1. (II) Let f : X → S be as in (Theorem B)n. We may reduce the problem to the case where S is an integral normal scheme (cf. Propo- sition 4.2). Let ν : Y → X be the normalisation of X, and let CX and CY denote the conductors in X and Y respectively. Then we proceed 4 by a quadruple induction on (dim X, dim S, δ(f), η(f)) ∈ Z≥0, where 4 we equip Z≥0 with the lexicographical order and, if ξ is the geometric generic point of S and CX,ξ is the fibre of CX → S over ξ, we denote by δ(f) the dimension of Xξ and by η(f) the number of the connected components of CX,ξ. As we are assuming (Theorem A)n, we have that ν∗L is relatively semi-ample and, by the induction hypothesis, we may assume that L|CX is relatively semi-ample. By a result of Ferrand, we can normalise X only along one horizontal component of CX , which drops η(f) exactly by one. For the sake of simplicity, we briefly overview two crucial cases: η(f) = 0 and η(f) = 1. Assume first that η(f) = 0. After taking a suitable faithfully flat finite cover of S (cf. Step 1 of Proposition 4.4), we may assume that there exists a closed subscheme Γ of X such that Γ → S is a generically universal homeomorphism. Applying Proposition 2.29, we may find a closed subscheme X′ on X that is set-theoretically equal to Γ over a generic locus over S and which satisfies the following properties (cf. Step 3 of Proposition 4.4): (i) L|X′ is relatively semi-ample by the induction hypothesis, and (ii) the relative semi-ampleness of L|X′ implies the one of L. Thus, we are done in the case η(f) = 0. Assume now that η(f) = 1. We consider the generic fibre Xη of f and, by assumption, the restriction of L to Xη is semi-ample. Using an argument similar to the previous case, we can show that L is relatively RELATIVE SEMI-AMPLENESS IN POSITIVE CHARACTERISTIC 5 semi-ample (cf.